ctdb reclock API for etcd/librados
martin at meltin.net
Fri Dec 9 23:21:21 UTC 2016
On Fri, 09 Dec 2016 14:18:12 -0600, José A. Rivera <jarrpa at samba.org>
> On 2016-12-09 06:40, David Disseldorp wrote:
> > Hi Martin,
> > On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 21:13:52 +1100, Martin Schwenke wrote:
> >> Hi David,
> >> On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:13:42 +0100, David Disseldorp <ddiss at suse.de>
> >> wrote:
> >> The extra files cause RPM build failures.
> >> We build RPMs to install on the nodes of the virtual clusters that we
> >> build to test with. This works well and only really matters because
> >> we
> >> need a consistent way of installing across a cluster - not something
> >> that is needed with non-clustered Samba.
> >> We could do:
> >> %define _unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0
> >> but then we could miss new core files that we definitely want to
> >> package. This happens to me occasionally when I forget to update the
> >> RPM spec file.
> > Ah okay, yeah that's a pretty common packaging challenge :-)
> > I guess we could make an effort to keep ctdb/packaging/RPM/ctdb.spec.in
> > up to date with any changes to the installation file manifest.
> Do we still need to update the spec file now for these new files?
We don't want to build them as part of the main RPM because we might not
have the the dependencies installed at either build or installation
Please take a look at the PCP pmda support. The etcd support in wscript
is now now similar to that. In ctdb/packaging/RPM/ctdb.spec.in we put
pmda support into a separate RPM... but only if rpmbuild is run with
--with-pmda. You could try putting something like that together. That
way we won't attempt to build and install it for now as part of
our testing. :-)
At some time in the future I might see if I can work out the
dependencies so that this can at least be built and packaged every
night. It took us a while, but we now do that for pmda. However,
right now we have other priorities for the Samba 4.6 release.
peace & happiness,
More information about the samba-technical